hawker84 wrote:is flynn even going to want to stay and be a back up, or will he ask for a trade.. i get the feeling this guy feels he's a starting caliber qb and is going to want a chance to compete.... i could actually see it getting ugly...

There's really no DEMANDING trades in the NFL for a backup QB. Players who demand trades are star players that if they sit out will seriously hurt their team. That's not the case with Flynn, he has zero leverage.

Nor do I think Flynn is the kind of player that would do that. Besides, he's making starter money for holding a clipboard. If anything, it'd be the Hawks that initiate a trade.........which I could see happening in the offseason if they can secure a veteran backup for cheap.

Unless we get a great offer, I'd like to Seattle hold onto Flynn. I firmly believe that Wilson is on a future HoF trajectory, but he's also 206 pounds and mobile. That kind of profile misses a lot of games from injury. We've been lucky so far that he has avoided notable injury. Granted, Wilson is really smart about how he takes contact and that helps tremendously. Still, imagine if we had a legit Superbowl run derailed because we had to switch to Josh Portis or a 7th round rookie next season? I could very easily see that happening. A 6th/7th round pick is nowhere near enough for Flynn to be worth it. The only way I'd sign off on a trade like that is if Portis makes huge strides or if Seattle drafts another Russell Wilson type steal in 2013.

We brought in Tim to compete for a quarterback spot on the roster we think Tim can give us simaler attributes to what russell gives us we want a quarterback that can do a variety of things for us much like Russell and if anything happens to Russel we won't lose anything blah blah blah...

Week 1 of the preseason vs. The Tennessee Titans, I said the Seahawks were winning the superbowl...

peachesenregalia wrote:Skater, no team will give up more than a 4th for him. He's proved nothing in a real NFL setting, except that he couldn't beat out a 3rd round 5'10" rookie, when he was all but a lock for the starting job after getting paid in FA. If some team is willing to do something like we did for Whitehurst, then our FO better jump all over it.

Why do people keep saying this?

Yeh he was beat out by a 5'10", 3rd round rookie. Big deal! That rookie is showing everyone why he won the job!

It isn't like Flynn is some scubb. He just didn't beat out a guy who looks to finally be the franchise QB we have been looking for the last upteen years.

I'm more alluding to league perception, Dom. WE know that Wilson is just that good, but around the league, they're going to see a player who was given decent money to come in and be the starter, and couldn't perform well enough to beat out a 3rd round rookie in preseason. It will diminish his perceived value.

iSurely you're not suggesting we in this forum, know more about the Wilson/Flynn situation, than the various execs, coaches and scouts from around the league. There are no secrets at this level, my FZ lovin' brutha.

...and what did the Raiders give for Carson Palmer? I would decscribe Palmer at that point as being washed up, but that would suggest he was ever worth a damn to begin with. I would take Flynn over Palmer in a second. QBs in this league are not in abundance like RBs or WRs etc. They are worth whatever you can get for them and that can vary dramatically with any given time. Who remembers us getting 2 1s from the Bears for Rick Mirer? Mirer was no better than Flynn. Many of you will argue that Flynn is unproven. OK, Mirer and Palmer were proven...to be shit. In conclusion, as a few rational people have suggested, we need to get over this move Flynn thing. Don't be afraid of success, Hawk fans.

PlinytheCenter wrote:Why are we even talking about this?? Can't we for just once have a relatively stable quarterback roster?

I'm with him. If we can work the money, we gotta. We have been very lucky so far, Wilson is a very mobile guy and takes off. His a great slider, but I don't line the idea of a ruined season if he gets hurt.

with them.

personally, I have a feeling flynn goes to another ( and plays well, he's a good qb), but I wouldn't mind retaining.

I am reasonably convinced that Flynn will be gone from Seattle some time next off season. First, he is disgruntled with his role. No, I don't have a source, but it is just plain to see. Second, his salary will be a vital part of extending some of the players from our first Pete and John draft. Third, the Raiders staff has ties to Flynn, and Palmer has crapped the bed in Oakland, leaving a nice trade partner in desperate straights. There are other teams too that will not be able to fill team needs in the draft, but for a variety of reasons did not pursue Flynn last year. Buffalo was dollar tied to Fitz, the Cards were hot for Peyton and also dollar tied to Kolb, with a hot prospect at backup, Minnesota and the Jags were still all in on rookies.

There will be plenty of suitors for Flynn, which is where his real market value will come from. A second would not surprise me at all. Especially since we already ate most of his signing bonus.

onanygivensunday wrote:What's the more important question is... what is Flynn's current value to the Seahawks

IMO, he is a very good insurance policy for which you've essentially already paid most of the premiums.

The Hawks will/should keep him until they have a better alternative.

When you have your Manning....backup is meaningless. Manning, Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers...... yup..their backups don't see the field. Our's will not see the field. Spend that money on securing guys we have that actually see the field.

Scottemojo wrote:I am reasonably convinced that Flynn will be gone from Seattle some time next off season. First, he is disgruntled with his role. No, I don't have a source, but it is just plain to see. Second, his salary will be a vital part of extending some of the players from our first Pete and John draft. Third, the Raiders staff has ties to Flynn, and Palmer has crapped the bed in Oakland, leaving a nice trade partner in desperate straights. There are other teams too that will not be able to fill team needs in the draft, but for a variety of reasons did not pursue Flynn last year. Buffalo was dollar tied to Fitz, the Cards were hot for Peyton and also dollar tied to Kolb, with a hot prospect at backup, Minnesota and the Jags were still all in on rookies.

There will be plenty of suitors for Flynn, which is where his real market value will come from. A second would not surprise me at all. Especially since we already ate most of his signing bonus.

T-Sizzle wrote:When you have your Manning....backup is meaningless. Manning, Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers...... yup..their backups don't see the field. Our's will not see the field. Spend that money on securing guys we have that actually see the field.

Lets think a bit more about this one

Brady went down for a season. They had a guy on the bench that had been there for a few years. Cassell played good for the team to the point where many said Brady was a result of the system. I think more having a backup in the same system paid off and they coached well during that year. They then got plenty out of trading Cassell

Now lets look at Indy - playoff, playoff, playoff, superbowl, playoff, playoff or something like that - Manning goes down and they have no backup result worst team in the league!!!!

What other examples - Big Ben motorcycle crash and I think out for a few other reasons that year. Miss playoff. Bears last year Cutler goes down they were a lock for playoffs but missed playoffs because of a bad bench

Rodgers is partially a result of getting to sit on the bench as a backup

So if your point was that even good / great qb's need a competent backup so you don't throw away a season then I see the point thanks for the great examples . The team as a whole is still not spending much money on the qb position. You need to keep Flynn OR trade him for a 1st or 2nd rounder and then use that pick / a lower pick for a rookie qb (low salary).

Not gonna lie, I was a little worried for a minute there when Russell got dinged up after the sack towards the end of the game. Of course, he got up, and after a timeout he was able to continue. Dude's a warrior.

As far as Flynn is concerned, I'd try and deal him in the offseason. As Scottemojo points out, the Raiders front office and coaching staff are filled with Green Bay guys. The Flynn connection is there. With the Raiders at 3-5 and not looking like "empty corpses" out there, it's very possible that they could play themselves out of one of the draft's top signal callers. They might want to look towards a veteran, as the Carson Palmer trade was not under their watch and thus not their fault. We won't be able to rip them off as if Al Davis were still alive, but he could net something like a 3rd or 4th rounder in return, all while getting his contract off your hands.

It'll definitely be interesting to see how this plays out but I'm with Scottemojo on this one. Flynn to the Raiders in the offseason for a midround pick or two even thought I'd love to steal Marcel Reese from them! Anyways, let's see how it pans out.

Scottemojo wrote:I am reasonably convinced that Flynn will be gone from Seattle some time next off season. First, he is disgruntled with his role. No, I don't have a source, but it is just plain to see. Second, his salary will be a vital part of extending some of the players from our first Pete and John draft. Third, the Raiders staff has ties to Flynn, and Palmer has crapped the bed in Oakland, leaving a nice trade partner in desperate straights. There are other teams too that will not be able to fill team needs in the draft, but for a variety of reasons did not pursue Flynn last year. Buffalo was dollar tied to Fitz, the Cards were hot for Peyton and also dollar tied to Kolb, with a hot prospect at backup, Minnesota and the Jags were still all in on rookies.

There will be plenty of suitors for Flynn, which is where his real market value will come from. A second would not surprise me at all. Especially since we already ate most of his signing bonus.

Personally I feel there will also be suitors to RW as well, but we'll see what's what after his first year completes.

Scottemojo wrote:I am reasonably convinced that Flynn will be gone from Seattle some time next off season. First, he is disgruntled with his role. No, I don't have a source, but it is just plain to see. Second, his salary will be a vital part of extending some of the players from our first Pete and John draft. Third, the Raiders staff has ties to Flynn, and Palmer has crapped the bed in Oakland, leaving a nice trade partner in desperate straights. There are other teams too that will not be able to fill team needs in the draft, but for a variety of reasons did not pursue Flynn last year. Buffalo was dollar tied to Fitz, the Cards were hot for Peyton and also dollar tied to Kolb, with a hot prospect at backup, Minnesota and the Jags were still all in on rookies.

There will be plenty of suitors for Flynn, which is where his real market value will come from. A second would not surprise me at all. Especially since we already ate most of his signing bonus.

Personally I feel there will also be suitors to RW as well, but we'll see what's what after his first year completes.

hawkfan1975 wrote:Funny, I agree with the yellow bolded. Are you saying you feel there is a chance RW is traded?

Of course you do.

No, I said there's possible better suitors for RW within the statement of "we shall see what's what with RW (after at least a year of play).Pretty cut and dry. I'm a RW fan but nowhere near the likes of some here. Time will tell the rooks tale.

Last edited by hawkfan1975 on Tue Nov 06, 2012 5:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.

hawkfan1975 wrote:Are you saying you feel there is a chance RW is traded?

No, I said there's possible better suitors for RW within the statement of "we shall see what's what with RW (after at least a year of play).Pretty cut and dry. I'm a RW fan but nowhere near the likes of some here. Time will tell the rooks tale.

Well, after a win is when we start seeing the "[player name] is the best", and "we're going to stomp [insert team here]. I just have to reiterate there's no way in heckfire I'm anointing a rook anything in his first year (wait and see is all we can do). Nor would it be honest to state a win with any of these upcoming games based on what we're seeing this year (and that's ok actually...as long as we're rebuilding for the better).

and man...I know it's craziness but I'm not sure I'm completely sold on Petey yet either (as HC), even after this long. There's some things that make the brows furrow thinking "wtf??" (then there are moments of brilliance).

Last edited by hawkfan1975 on Tue Nov 06, 2012 5:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

hawkfan1975 wrote:and man...I know it's craziness but I'm not sure I'm completely sold on Petey yet either (as a HC), even after this long. There's some things that make the brows furrow thinking "wtf??" (then there are moments of brilliance).

hawkfan1975 wrote:Well, after a win is when we start seeing the "[player name] is the best", and "we're going to stomp [insert team here]. I just have to reiterate there's no way in heckfire I'm anointing a rook anything in his first year (wait and see is all we can do). Nor would it be honest to state a win with any of these upcoming games based on what we're seeing this year (and that's ok actually...as long as we're rebuilding for the better).

So basically you sit on the fence until they win the Superbowl? At what point in your mind will PC and RW get your approval? I do agree there is a small fraction that overreact but the majority of the people here seem pretty level headed.

After we win out and the rest of the nfc west loses out we will rest rw3 for our last game and Matt Flynn will go out and toss 6tds. We will then be offered a teams entire draft for him ala Ricky Williams. And so it is written.

DrinkinTheLimerade wrote:After we win out and the rest of the nfc west loses out we will rest rw3 for our last game and Matt Flynn will go out and toss 6tds. We will then be offered a teams entire draft for him ala Ricky Williams. And so it is written.

T-Sizzle wrote:When you have your Manning....backup is meaningless. Manning, Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers...... yup..their backups don't see the field. Our's will not see the field. Spend that money on securing guys we have that actually see the field.

Lets think a bit more about this one

Brady went down for a season. They had a guy on the bench that had been there for a few years. Cassell played good for the team to the point where many said Brady was a result of the system. I think more having a backup in the same system paid off and they coached well during that year. They then got plenty out of trading Cassell

Now lets look at Indy - playoff, playoff, playoff, superbowl, playoff, playoff or something like that - Manning goes down and they have no backup result worst team in the league!!!!

What other examples - Big Ben motorcycle crash and I think out for a few other reasons that year. Miss playoff. Bears last year Cutler goes down they were a lock for playoffs but missed playoffs because of a bad bench

Rodgers is partially a result of getting to sit on the bench as a backup

So if your point was that even good / great qb's need a competent backup so you don't throw away a season then I see the point thanks for the great examples . The team as a whole is still not spending much money on the qb position. You need to keep Flynn OR trade him for a 1st or 2nd rounder and then use that pick / a lower pick for a rookie qb (low salary).

T-Sizzle wrote:When you have your Manning....backup is meaningless. Manning, Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers...... yup..their backups don't see the field. Our's will not see the field. Spend that money on securing guys we have that actually see the field.

Lets think a bit more about this one

Brady went down for a season. They had a guy on the bench that had been there for a few years. Cassell played good for the team to the point where many said Brady was a result of the system. I think more having a backup in the same system paid off and they coached well during that year. They then got plenty out of trading Cassell

Now lets look at Indy - playoff, playoff, playoff, superbowl, playoff, playoff or something like that - Manning goes down and they have no backup result worst team in the league!!!!

What other examples - Big Ben motorcycle crash and I think out for a few other reasons that year. Miss playoff. Bears last year Cutler goes down they were a lock for playoffs but missed playoffs because of a bad bench

Rodgers is partially a result of getting to sit on the bench as a backup

So if your point was that even good / great qb's need a competent backup so you don't throw away a season then I see the point thanks for the great examples . The team as a whole is still not spending much money on the qb position. You need to keep Flynn OR trade him for a 1st or 2nd rounder and then use that pick / a lower pick for a rookie qb (low salary).

I guess the other option is picking up Vick for cheap

Thats fantastic, but if you are going to pay big bucks for a backup I would prefer we had an experienced proven vet. Why waste money on a backup QB with 2 games experience? Its not logical.

T-Sizzle wrote:When you have your Manning....backup is meaningless. Manning, Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers...... yup..their backups don't see the field. Our's will not see the field. Spend that money on securing guys we have that actually see the field.

Lets think a bit more about this one

Brady went down for a season. They had a guy on the bench that had been there for a few years. Cassell played good for the team to the point where many said Brady was a result of the system. I think more having a backup in the same system paid off and they coached well during that year. They then got plenty out of trading Cassell

Now lets look at Indy - playoff, playoff, playoff, superbowl, playoff, playoff or something like that - Manning goes down and they have no backup result worst team in the league!!!!

What other examples - Big Ben motorcycle crash and I think out for a few other reasons that year. Miss playoff. Bears last year Cutler goes down they were a lock for playoffs but missed playoffs because of a bad bench

Rodgers is partially a result of getting to sit on the bench as a backup

So if your point was that even good / great qb's need a competent backup so you don't throw away a season then I see the point thanks for the great examples . The team as a whole is still not spending much money on the qb position. You need to keep Flynn OR trade him for a 1st or 2nd rounder and then use that pick / a lower pick for a rookie qb (low salary).

I guess the other option is picking up Vick for cheap

Thats fantastic, but if you are going to pay big bucks for a backup I would prefer we had an experienced proven vet. Why waste money on a backup QB with 2 games experience? Its not logical.

I apparently misunderstood your previous post....that is why I described it as excellent. I was under the impression you had quit hating on Flynn and felt we should keep him as a back up. Now I see that's not the case, and that you were likey serious in considering Vick. I take it back.

T-Sizzle wrote:Thats fantastic, but if you are going to pay big bucks for a backup I would prefer we had an experienced proven vet. Why waste money on a backup QB with 2 games experience? Its not logical.

Just curious to know what proven vets you are thinking of ? Those type of guys are few and far between.

mikeak wrote:Thats fantastic, but if you are going to pay big bucks for a backup I would prefer we had an experienced proven vet. Why waste money on a backup QB with 2 games experience? Its not logical.

It is not that much money that you are spending on the qb position as a whole. RW is locked into his contract and the only way to get a cheaper and as capable qb is by 1) Wasting a draft pick on a qb in the 1st maybe 2nd round and then you loose a starter elsewhere or 2) pick up a FA that is going to cost more or 3) trade for one but then you better believe you will pay even more

Tell me how you get someone that you think has the same potential to win games (not just to come in and start) for less money than you are paying Flynn and remember that we are not paying millions to the guy starting for another 2 years and are not allowed to renegotiate the contract with him for that time so it is not like he is going to sit out.........

So continue to pay less than $10 million for the two qb's on the roster and have a great starter with a solid backup ( you think) or free up a few million but end up one injury away from being a bottom feeder in the NFL......... to me it is an easy choice and I would only trade Flynn if I get enough picks to get another qb capable of winning games

T-Sizzle wrote:I apparently misunderstood your previous post....that is why I described it as excellent. I was under the impression you had quit hating on Flynn and felt we should keep him as a back up. Now I see that's not the case, and that you were likey serious in considering Vick. I take it back.

You liked my post which T-sizzle disagreed with so you can keep the excellent comment as we are different people

T-Sizzle wrote:Thats fantastic, but if you are going to pay big bucks for a backup I would prefer we had an experienced proven vet. Why waste money on a backup QB with 2 games experience? Its not logical.

Just curious to know what proven vets you are thinking of ? Those type of guys are few and far between.

Jason Campbell, Tjax, Matt Moore are three examples of guys that will be free agents next year.... all of which have played significant more time than Flynn you could pay them less money....and they are proven, veteran QBs with NFL starts under their belts.

You pay less money, for a guy that has shown he can play..... versus paying a lot of money for a guy that has proven nothing. Would you prefer a guy with 64 career games started at less money or a guy with 2 games started at a higher salary?

Even if you wanted to pay Campbell the same salary as Flynn I would be fine with that. Flynn is an unknown and Im not comfortable with the backup QB being an unknown. If you want an unknown you certainly shouldn't be paying him what he is making.

T-Sizzle wrote:So basically you sit on the fence until they win the Superbowl? At what point in your mind will PC and RW get your approval? I do agree there is a small fraction that overreact but the majority of the people here seem pretty level headed.

There's individual players, and then there's the entire team. No "sitting on any fence" when it comes to our team.Player anointing or predictions being a different animal.

Rooks get the wait and see approach. It simply must be. * But for the RW'rs out there: there are some games where RW looks promising (just that more needs to be seen).

Matt Flynn 3/18/2012: Signed a three-year, $19.5 million contract. The deal contains $10 million guaranteed -- a $6 million signing bonus, Flynn's 2012 base salary, and $2 million of his second-year salary. Another $5 million is available through escalators. An additional $2 million worth of incentives is available, but is "unlikely to be earned." 2012: $2 million, 2013: $5.25 million, 2014: $6.25 million, 2015: Free Agent

Matt Moore 2.75 million

Jason Campbell Signed a one-year, $3.5 million contract. The deal included a $2 million signing bonus. Another $1 million is available through incentives based on playing time. 2012: $1.4 million (+ $100,000 workout bonus), 2013: Free Agent

Tjack 2012: $1.75 million, 2013: Free Agent

If I figured it right Seattle is paying him 6 million next year because of the guaranteed money, I might be wrong. Somebody correct me if I am. Campbell got payed 5.5 Million with signing bonus and there's incentives. I doubt he'll take much less then that next year. Tjack would be logical from a financial and playbook stand point, but why sign Flynn over Tjack in the first place. I think Carroll got what he needed out of Tjack and would only prosue this line is we could get draft pick(s) for Flynn. Matt Moore isn't a bad choice, he'll probably cost about the same as this year (2.75) with a signing bonus plus incentives. The biggest thing I would mention is Flynn as are Back up will have had one year under are offense in the books and be part of the team. I get what your saying but it's not going to change much if at all the budget or cap (Moore or Campbell), maybe a little (Tjack).

SeahawkGeoff wrote:Matt Flynn 3/18/2012: Signed a three-year, $19.5 million contract. The deal contains $10 million guaranteed -- a $6 million signing bonus, Flynn's 2012 base salary, and $2 million of his second-year salary. Another $5 million is available through escalators. An additional $2 million worth of incentives is available, but is "unlikely to be earned." 2012: $2 million, 2013: $5.25 million, 2014: $6.25 million, 2015: Free Agent

Matt Moore 2.75 million

Jason Campbell Signed a one-year, $3.5 million contract. The deal included a $2 million signing bonus. Another $1 million is available through incentives based on playing time. 2012: $1.4 million (+ $100,000 workout bonus), 2013: Free Agent

Tjack 2012: $1.75 million, 2013: Free Agent

If I figured it right Seattle is paying him 6 million next year because of the guaranteed money, I might be wrong. Somebody correct me if I am. Campbell got payed 5.5 Million with signing bonus and there's incentives. I doubt he'll take much less then that next year. Tjack would be logical from a financial and playbook stand point, but why sign Flynn over Tjack in the first place. I think Carroll got what he needed out of Tjack and would only prosue this line is we could get draft pick(s) for Flynn. Matt Moore isn't a bad choice, he'll probably cost about the same as this year (2.75) with a signing bonus plus incentives. The biggest thing I would mention is Flynn as are Back up will have had one year under are offense in the books and be part of the team. I get what your saying but it's not going to change much if at all the budget or cap (Moore or Campbell), maybe a little (Tjack).

If you are going to spend the money, spend it on a proven commodity. Why would you pay Matt Flynn more than Jason Campbell......that alone and the numbers you listed above (right or wrong) indicate that Flynn is being overpaid and will be cut or take a huge pay cut. There is NO WAY pc and js will look at payroll and feel that is ok. They have been very smart with their money.

SeahawkGeoff wrote:Matt Flynn 3/18/2012: Signed a three-year, $19.5 million contract. The deal contains $10 million guaranteed -- a $6 million signing bonus, Flynn's 2012 base salary, and $2 million of his second-year salary. Another $5 million is available through escalators. An additional $2 million worth of incentives is available, but is "unlikely to be earned." 2012: $2 million, 2013: $5.25 million, 2014: $6.25 million, 2015: Free Agent

Matt Moore 2.75 million

Jason Campbell Signed a one-year, $3.5 million contract. The deal included a $2 million signing bonus. Another $1 million is available through incentives based on playing time. 2012: $1.4 million (+ $100,000 workout bonus), 2013: Free Agent

Tjack 2012: $1.75 million, 2013: Free Agent

If I figured it right Seattle is paying him 6 million next year because of the guaranteed money, I might be wrong. Somebody correct me if I am. Campbell got payed 5.5 Million with signing bonus and there's incentives. I doubt he'll take much less then that next year. Tjack would be logical from a financial and playbook stand point, but why sign Flynn over Tjack in the first place. I think Carroll got what he needed out of Tjack and would only prosue this line is we could get draft pick(s) for Flynn. Matt Moore isn't a bad choice, he'll probably cost about the same as this year (2.75) with a signing bonus plus incentives. The biggest thing I would mention is Flynn as are Back up will have had one year under are offense in the books and be part of the team. I get what your saying but it's not going to change much if at all the budget or cap (Moore or Campbell), maybe a little (Tjack).

If you are going to spend the money, spend it on a proven commodity. Why would you pay Matt Flynn more than Jason Campbell......that alone and the numbers you listed above (right or wrong) indicate that Flynn is being overpaid and will be cut or take a huge pay cut. There is NO WAY pc and js will look at payroll and feel that is ok. They have been very smart with their money.

The money is already spent. Weather Flynn is being overpaid or not he is guaranteed another 4 million no matter what. So there not going to cut him and pay him 4 million, that's just not going to happen. Why would Flynn restructure his contract when his contract is for 3 years. They may cut him after his second year. The way I see it the only way Carroll lets him go is for draft pick(s). Until that happens (meaning a team is willing to cough up picks for him) he's here for another year. So the Jason Campbell's of the world will have to wait at least another year regardless.

SeahawkGeoff wrote:The money is already spent. Weather Flynn is being overpaid or not he is guaranteed another 4 million no matter what. So there not going to cut him and pay him 4 million, that's just not going to happen. Why would Flynn restructure his contract when his contract is for 3 years. They may cut him after his second year. The way I see it the only way Carroll lets him go is for draft pick(s). Until that happens (meaning a team is willing to cough up picks for him) he's here for another year. So the Jason Campbell's of the world will have to wait at least another year regardless.

Flynn received a $6M signing bonus and base salaries of $2M this season, $5.25M in 2013 and $6.25M in 2014. His base salary is guaranteed this season, and $2 million of his base salary in '13 also is guaranteed.

The total guaranteed money is $10M.

Flynn's contract also contains escalator clauses in 2013 and '14 that reportedly could increase the total value of the contract by another $5M.

Okay I hate trying to figure out contracts. So 6 million signing bonus plus 2 million this year and then 2 million 2013 which makes 10 million or have I got that wrong again. Cause it's defiantly 10 million guaranteed, right?. They would still be losing another 2 million if they cut him next year, or have I got that wrong and it's staring me in the face?

SeahawkGeoff wrote:Okay I hate trying to figure out contracts. So 6 million signing bonus plus 2 million this year and then 2 million 2013 which makes 10 million or have I got that wrong again. Cause it's defiantly 10 million guaranteed, right?. They would still be losing another 2 million if they cut him next year, or have I got that wrong and it's staring me in the face?

on a side note....isn't just the most annoying emoticon of all time. I want to punch it every time I see it.

I believe his signing bonus counts this year and next correct? So you save nothing by cutting him. He'll count against the cap, unless they can use the amnesty clause, but I don't think they can because he'll only be in year 2 of a contract.